Sunday, 9 May 2010

Springfield Ward Results

We Yiddishe kep are supposed to be renown for the content of our craniums. Nobel prizes, desert blooming, Einstein and all the rest. What we hear less of is of yiddishe foolhardiness which blessed be the Lord above has been concentrated in Hackney to a disproportionate degree.

Have a look at the local elections which took place in the shadow of the national elections. In the national contest Dianne Abbott's victory may have been a foregone conclusion irrespective of Satmar's canvassing on her behalf for her efforts to prevent Yemenites landing up on what she would probably deem Palestinian land irrespective whether they went to Gush Etzyon or Tel Aviv. The same goes for Jules Pipes who owes us nothing and does for us even less. Our representatives from the Buffoon onwards rubbed Labour's noses into it when it suited their agenda and now that we're on our backfoot it's payback time. Not at all fair especially when seeing his grovelling at the Muslim Centre but nonetheless rather difficult to complain.

Where the outcome was anything but certain was the local elections where the frum have significant numbers in some of the wards. Even if they aren't a majority, since people are persuaded to vote tribally rather than on any rational basis, and not voting for the heimishe is almost a betrayal a high heimishe turnout can be guaranteed to defeat the opponents. (Tessler may be an exception being unsuitable even for the local Tories which is saying something.)

In Springfield there were 3 Tories, Steinberger, Levy and Napier of which the first 2got in by a whisker, 1 of them apparently with a majority of 12, but the third lost. To achieve that loss there can be only 2 explanations. One is that Labour and Lib-Dem supporters went for the first 2 in large numbers because they're good looking or because the electors' philo-semitism led them to abandon their party affiliations for the sake of 2 frum guys. Another possible explanation could just be that heimishe voters sought out heimishe names and they don't come much more heimish than Steinberger and Levy. As for the others, well let them jump in the waterless pond.

I leave it to you which is the more plausible explanation. Perfectly legitimate of course but please don't then complain when we're accused of tribalism.


Bearded said...

Sadly, communalism is all too common in local and national politics. It`s understandable, of course, but I do think that it is a narrow perspective. I`m sure that most communities are "guilty" of this - whether Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or gay.

Pricked and Tickled said...

That may indeed be the case but I wonder how it is in the community's interest to be in perpetual opposition? One explanation I heard over the weekend was because the leader of the opposition is entitled to a large payout.

And if there were some benefit not to sit on the government benches surely a strong opposition would increase that benefit. So how are we served by voting only for unzere?

Bearded said...

The Stamford Hill frum community is generally socially conservative, so, ultimately, it`s "natural" home is the Conservative Party. And, in Hackney, that will always mean being in opposition.

I`d like to see more open voting patterns, for maybe the Lib Dems or Labour, but you do wonder, given the generally socially liberal politics of these parties, how much they would fit in? I dunno. Maybe the community should embrace more liberal ideals?

IfYouTickleUs said...

I started writing a blog on that very subject but didn't get to finish it. While they are socially conservative the majority has more to gain from Labour handouts and less to lose from higher taxes than from the reverse Conservative policies in those areas. In Haringey they voted for Labour and Revach didn't get very far. I'm also not too sure how much people round here are in tune with s.28 and other dividing lines between the parties.

There are many reasons why the frum broadly vote Conservative but I think in the local elections they would vote for anyone if he (never a she!) was kosher enough and endorsed by 'those in the know'.